Canada at the 2026 Milano Cortina: Winter Olympics

[txlseries4]

Heartbreaking. At least it was just one gold medal game… I couldn’t take a bo7 loss so soon after the Jays run.

Hated the 3-on-3 for overtime. Canada should have just put 5 on the ice for OT since the refs showed they weren’t capable of counting players

 

[christiesplits]

Wow, what a heartbreaker. MacKinnon is going to be haunted by that open net for years.

Hoping this isn't the last time Crosby plays in a Team Canada uniform.

 

[Jonny5]

Only if Crosby weren't injured would Canada be more likely to win the gold.

Canada doesn't and shouldn't need Crosby to win. There was a lack of presence in front of the net because some old guys and grinders were added on to the roster where there were clearly better options, but those old guys "deserved the chance for gold" which was taken completely for granted. They had to hang on by their fingernails to get through the quarter and semi finals.

Binnington is erratic in net, but it's not like Canada has better. The USA goalie pipeline has increased dramatically. So has their pool of star players. It's not 2010 anymore.

One wonders what Toronto-born Zach Hyman could have done if he were there, but no sense on dwelling on that now.

The USA is seriously taking over hockey. I wouldn't be surprised in a future where more than half of NHL players are born in the USA. They are at about 30% now to Canada's dwindling 45%.

 

[Admiral Beez]

There was a lack of presence in front of the net because some old guys and grinders were added on to the roster where there were clearly better options, but those old guys "deserved the chance for gold" which was taken completely for granted.

The women’s team was also on the older side (avg 29, oldest 37) compared to the USA (avg 23 y/o, oldest 36) and others. Perhaps it’s time to pass the torch?

 

[lenaitch]

Hellebuyck was the difference in the game.

That guy deserves two medals or a piece of everybody else's.

Heartbreaking. At least it was just one gold medal game… I couldn’t take a bo7 loss so soon after the Jays run.

Hated the 3-on-3 for overtime. Canada should have just put 5 on the ice for OT since the refs showed they weren’t capable of counting players

Not a fan either.

Although it's the official's job, at least in the other game, many of the extra players were down ice. I think even the play-by-play people missed it. In this game, everything was right there; the benches, the play and the officials.

Canada doesn't and shouldn't need Crosby to win. There was a lack of presence in front of the net because some old guys and grinders were added on to the roster where there were clearly better options, but those old guys "deserved the chance for gold" which was taken completely for granted. They had to hang on by their fingernails to get through the quarter and semi finals.

Binnington is erratic in net, but it's not like Canada has better. The USA goalie pipeline has increased dramatically. So has their pool of star players. It's not 2010 anymore.

One wonders what Toronto-born Zach Hyman could have done if he were there, but no sense on dwelling on that now.

The USA is seriously taking over hockey. I wouldn't be surprised in a future where more than half of NHL players are born in the USA. They are at about 30% now to Canada's dwindling 45%.

Goaltenders today are so good it is very difficult to score on them directly anymore. You need traffic, blocking and deflections.

I'm not sure I would agree that the US is "taking over" hockey. Our 45% is still coming from a position of roughly 1/10 the population, but we are certainly losing ground. They have significantly upped their game in terms of the feeder networks all the way down to the kids. Their sub-organizations are approaching ours (not even counting their college sports scholarship programs), while we have essentially remained stagnant. The cynic in me would say it's all part of Bettman's plan to put major league hockey in all sorts of non-traditional markets and leave Quebec and southern Ontario to languish.

 

[PL1]

I get that for TV reasons they don't want unlimited hockey games. But maybe 5v5 for 10 then take off 1 player every 5 minutes down to 3v3? Something has to be better than 3v3 right away. They almost should flip a coin at that point

 

[AlbertC]

Canada doesn't and shouldn't need Crosby to win. There was a lack of presence in front of the net because some old guys and grinders were added on to the roster where there were clearly better options, but those old guys "deserved the chance for gold" which was taken completely for granted. They had to hang on by their fingernails to get through the quarter and semi finals.

Binnington is erratic in net, but it's not like Canada has better. The USA goalie pipeline has increased dramatically. So has their pool of star players. It's not 2010 anymore.

One wonders what Toronto-born Zach Hyman could have done if he were there, but no sense on dwelling on that now.

The USA is seriously taking over hockey. I wouldn't be surprised in a future where more than half of NHL players are born in the USA. They are at about 30% now to Canada's dwindling 45%.

Hockey Canada is notorious for being an old boys club. They stayed loyal to guys like Drew Doughty, who although is a future hall of famer and member of the 4 Nations winning team, is past his best before date. And as long as guys like Marchand were healthy enough, they weren't going to leave him off the roster completely. Unfortunately he wasn't much of a factor.

Celebrini and Bedard are two of Canada's brightest young stars, and it would've been tough to not take at least one but they were probably hesitant to do so. Celebrini being one of the league's top point getters so far this season made it impossible to not take him. And Bedard's injury where he missed a few weeks gave them a convenient reason to not consider him that seriously.

Canada's goalie depth is terribly weak. Binnington is only here for his past achievements, and has had a poor season with St. Louis. Although I would say that the loss wasn't completely on him. I think all the missed shots, that notably poor 5 on 3 power play execution by Canada, Hellebuyck's big saves, and Americans being ultimately more clutch, were the difference makers. With that said, Canada has definitely declined in the goalies we develop. Gone are the days where we had to luxury of relying on the likes of Patrick Roy, Brodeur, Luongo, Fleury, Price etc. Logan Thompson has been quite good this season for Washington but doesn't have the confidence of the coaches to start ahead of Binner. And he doesn't have the career resume of the Canadian goalies of yesteryears. Whereas the Americans are stacked now in this department.

I think the US has also taken significant leaps in defencemen. Makar and Quinn Hughes are probably pretty even for best D-man in the league, but behind that I think the US now has the edge. Werenski, McAvoy, Sanderson, and Faber are complete defencemen and often an upgrade over their Canadian counterpart. They also had the luxury of leaving guys like Adam Fox and Lane Hutson off the team as they were deemed redundant. While frankly Canada has a lot of D-men that are kind of "mid", like Parayko, Sanheim, Harley. And even guys like Shea Theodore and Devon Toews who have some winning pedigree with their club teams, aren't that special.

I'm not sure if Hyman would've been one of the more immediate players in consideration. Canada will always have the problem of selecting the the right group to put together on a roster. Some like Mark Scheifele, Evan Bouchard have been consistently shunned. And others like Bedard, Wyatt Johnston, Schaefer, Konecny, Chychrun, Batherson were on the outside looking in this time around, but may be options in the future especially for Bedard, Schaefer and Johnston. But the same can be said about the Americans, they could've had the likes of Jason Robertson, Caufield, Hutson, Zegras, Knies, etc.

The US has definitely taken hockey seriously within the past decade or so. Playing in the NCAA system is arguably seen as a better development route than the CHL now. As shown with Canadian kids like Celebrini, Fantilli, McKenna, etc. choosing to hone their craft there. Canada still produces a lot of raw talent and the players show up on the drafts every year, but we have trouble with having them prepare for the pros. Whereas the Americans are better preparing their youth to be NHL ready. From around 2020 onwards, quite a few top draft picks like Lafreniere, Byfield, Owen Power, Shane Wright have turned out to be pretty mediocre in the NHL. While some Americans who were drafted lower turned out to be better pros.

 

[Mihairokov]

One wonders what Toronto-born Zach Hyman could have done if he were there, but no sense on dwelling on that now.

He wouldn't have done any more than Hagel or Reinhart or Bennett did.

I'm not sure I would agree that the US is "taking over" hockey. Our 45% is still coming from a position of roughly 1/10 the population, but we are certainly losing ground. They have significantly upped their game in terms of the feeder networks all the way down to the kids. Their sub-organizations are approaching ours (not even counting their college sports scholarship programs), while we have essentially remained stagnant. The cynic in me would say it's all part of Bettman's plan to put major league hockey in all sorts of non-traditional markets and leave Quebec and southern Ontario to languish.

This has been coming for decades now. Shouldn't be surprising that the US has caught up and will eventually pass us completely. Hockey Canada does not centrally develop players and relies solely on numbers to produce talent and hope for the best. That's no longer good enough. The program needs a devoted GM and Coach(es) to get national team players together at semi-frequent meets throughout the year and especially in the summer. Create something that looks like a program instead of throwing a group of guys together at the last second.

I get that for TV reasons they don't want unlimited hockey games. But maybe 5v5 for 10 then take off 1 player every 5 minutes down to 3v3? Something has to be better than 3v3 right away. They almost should flip a coin at that point

3v3 OT, for both the men and women, was a poor way to decide it. First OT should be 5v5, and if they can't resolve that after 20 minutes then shootout. GMG cannot go forever due to closing ceremonies.

Canada's goalie depth is terribly weak. Binnington is only here for his past achievements, and has had a poor season with St. Louis. Although I would say that the loss wasn't completely on him. I think all the missed shots, that notably poor 5 on 3 power play execution by Canada, Hellebuyck's big saves, and Americans being ultimately more clutch, were the difference makers. With that said, Canada has definitely declined in the goalies we develop. Gone are the days where we had to luxury of relying on the likes of Patrick Roy, Brodeur, Luongo, Fleury, Price etc. Logan Thompson has been quite good this season for Washington but doesn't have the confidence of the coaches to start ahead of Binner. And he doesn't have the career resume of the Canadian goalies of yesteryears. Whereas the Americans are stacked now in this department.

I think the most jarring thing about this loss is that the roster probably doesn't get a ton better in four years. Players like Crosby drop off, players like McDavid and MacKinnon are suddenly 33 and 34 respectively, and beyond Celebrini/Bedard/Schaefer there isn't a swell of new talent like there has been in the past. Exceptional status players are not panning out. The goaltending situation does not markedly improve. Russia and Belarus will be back by 2030 - a note that I frequently bring up is that Canada has only won twice and finished third once in the five years that Russia has been absent from the World Juniors U20s. Canada has fully missed the podium twice in that competition whilst one of its top teams are MIA. If this Canada team in 2026 struggles with Czechia and Finland they'll struggle when Russia returns, too, and the field will further tighten.

For all the talk about the US winning and improving I don't think there's been enough said about the rest of the field. This was arguably the best teams that Germany, Switzerland, and France have ever put forward in international competition. Switzerland doesn't have much more of a ceiling left but a country like Germany does, and if they continue to tighten the field it'll become more difficult for Canada to get consistent results. Gone are the days of beating Germany by a touchdown like we did in Vancouver.

I don't want to post as if the sky is falling after two silver medals but it's tough to get much positivity out of either performance. Both teams' selections were miserable and missed the mark.

 

[lenaitch]

This has been coming for decades now. Shouldn't be surprising that the US has caught up and will eventually pass us completely. Hockey Canada does not centrally develop players and relies solely on numbers to produce talent and hope for the best. That's no longer good enough. The program needs a devoted GM and Coach(es) to get national team players together at semi-frequent meets throughout the year and especially in the summer. Create something that looks like a program instead of throwing a group of guys together at the last second.

I heard a commentator say that the Finnish team is a true national team and has played together for quite some time. Tough to do do in a large country like Canada when the organizations are provincially/regionally based. Also tough to do if we want to include professionals.

3v3 OT, for both the men and women, was a poor way to decide it. First OT should be 5v5, and if they can't resolve that after 20 minutes then shootout. GMG cannot go forever due to closing ceremonies.

I dislike shootouts more than their overtime format.

For all the talk about the US winning and improving I don't think there's been enough said about the rest of the field. This was arguably the best teams that Germany, Switzerland, and France have ever put forward in international competition. Switzerland doesn't have much more of a ceiling left but a country like Germany does, and if they continue to tighten the field it'll become more difficult for Canada to get consistent results. Gone are the days of beating Germany by a touchdown like we did in Vancouver.

I wouldn't overlook China either. They seem to focus more on individual and small team sports but they have shown the ability to dominate a field in a fairly short period of time if they put their mind to it.

 

[Mihairokov]

I heard a commentator say that the Finnish team is a true national team and has played together for quite some time. Tough to do do in a large country like Canada when the organizations are provincially/regionally based. Also tough to do if we want to include professionals.

The Finnish camps in the summer include their professionals. Wouldn't be difficult for HC to formalize something and make guys show up to Calgary or Toronto for a week every now and again.

I dislike shootouts more than their overtime format.

Organizers need to guarantee the event can end. No Olympic sports have endless overtime, except maybe basketball?

I wouldn't overlook China either. They seem to focus more on individual and small team sports but they have shown the ability to dominate a field in a fairly short period of time if they put their mind to it.

China's model is something we should be replicating to some degree but they're coming at things from an ultra-centralized position as opposed to our entirely-open position. All of their medals in Milano-Cortina came in freestyle skiing, speed skating, and snowboarding. Some of the sports they dominate at the Summer Olympics are more legacy sports, or sports that have been popular for a while (Table Tennis, Badminton) whilst others they're new to and found an opening to dominate (Diving). We can do similar, where we can start really focusing our efforts on speedskating and snowboarding and skiing, sports we're already good at, but unfortunately sports that China will also be moving in to. The goal would be to identify sports that don't currently have a dominant nation and begin working on developing there. Germany dominates luge, Norway dominates biathlon, etc. so there's no real point devoting a ton of time to those. Canada's "problem" for a long time has been that we've always been strong in events that hand out the fewest medals (Curling, Hockey), however; they've added an additional mixed curling medal that we've only won once in three editions, so that's on us. If they were to add 3-on-3 hockey do we think we'd automatically medal in men's/women's/mixed? Food for thought.

An aside, but it's always been curious to me why the Dutch aren't better at ice hockey. They're great at speed skating, and they're good at field hockey, but are MIA in ice hockey. Weird.

 

[AlbertC]

I think the most jarring thing about this loss is that the roster probably doesn't get a ton better in four years. Players like Crosby drop off, players like McDavid and MacKinnon are suddenly 33 and 34 respectively, and beyond Celebrini/Bedard/Schaefer there isn't a swell of new talent like there has been in the past. Exceptional status players are not panning out. The goaltending situation does not markedly improve. Russia and Belarus will be back by 2030 - a note that I frequently bring up is that Canada has only won twice and finished third once in the five years that Russia has been absent from the World Juniors U20s. Canada has fully missed the podium twice in that competition whilst one of its top teams are MIA. If this Canada team in 2026 struggles with Czechia and Finland they'll struggle when Russia returns, too, and the field will further tighten.

For all the talk about the US winning and improving I don't think there's been enough said about the rest of the field. This was arguably the best teams that Germany, Switzerland, and France have ever put forward in international competition. Switzerland doesn't have much more of a ceiling left but a country like Germany does, and if they continue to tighten the field it'll become more difficult for Canada to get consistent results. Gone are the days of beating Germany by a touchdown like we did in Vancouver.

I don't want to post as if the sky is falling after two silver medals but it's tough to get much positivity out of either performance. Both teams' selections were miserable and missed the mark.

Indeed. McDavid and MacKinnon in four years should still be effective and among the best in world, if following the Crosby career trajectory. But they will be in the twilight stages of their absolute prime. And that is assuming they're able to remain substantially healthy. Makar will also be 31 by then. The World Cup of Hockey expected to be played in 2028 may be the last tournament where McDavid and MacKinnon will be at their ultimate peaks. Whereas the US has a core that is more robust age-wise, and majority of their current squad to be within the 28 to 32 age range in four years.

Team Canada as constructed right now is top heavy and too reliant on their elite stars. While the US were more strategic in assembling a squad that had the objective of beating Canada. Outside of the best 4 or 5 players on Canada, the rest seem more like system players who capitalize of being part of a good NHL team. Compared to the Americans who have a more well rounded and complete team, being an onslaught of players who are almost all 80 to 90 point getters in the NHL, that all buy in to playing a similar style and mantra.

Yes, Russia's return will definitely spice things up further. Germany and Switzerland will be tough outs, as they have a handful of NHL level talent, with a few stars mixed in there. And perhaps Denmark to a lesser degree. There's definitely less pushover minnows out there compared to previous years, and all it takes is for a top team to slip up and run into a hot goalie for upsets to happen.

 

[junctionist]

Hockey Canada needs to be scrambling to develop more world-class goalies through the appropriate channels. I grew up watching Martin Brodeur, Patrick Roy, Curtis Joseph, and Eddy Belfour, and I can't believe how far we've fallen in this regard.

 

[Jonny5]

China's model is something we should be replicating to some degree but they're coming at things from an ultra-centralized position as opposed to our entirely-open position. All of their medals in Milano-Cortina came in freestyle skiing, speed skating, and snowboarding. Some of the sports they dominate at the Summer Olympics are more legacy sports, or sports that have been popular for a while (Table Tennis, Badminton) whilst others they're new to and found an opening to dominate (Diving). We can do similar, where we can start really focusing our efforts on speedskating and snowboarding and skiing, sports we're already good at, but unfortunately sports that China will also be moving in to. The goal would be to identify sports that don't currently have a dominant nation and begin working on developing there. Germany dominates luge, Norway dominates biathlon, etc. so there's no real point devoting a ton of time to those. Canada's "problem" for a long time has been that we've always been strong in events that hand out the fewest medals (Curling, Hockey), however; they've added an additional mixed curling medal that we've only won once in three editions, so that's on us. If they were to add 3-on-3 hockey do we think we'd automatically medal in men's/women's/mixed? Food for thought.

There's also the issue of how some sports simply have more medals per effort than others. There's something like 28 gold medals given out for sports involving skiing and snowboarding, while there's only 2 for hockey and something like 4 for curling, which is weird as they dominate so much of the Olympic games. It seemed like there were ten curling matches every single day through the entirety of the games. Hundreds of people play competitively to work their way up to that national curling team or the hockey teams, but we're never going to have hundreds with an opportunity to seriously attempt to be a world class competitive alpine skier in Canada.

Also, a lot of these Olympians are from very wealthy families to begin with and have access to resources that which a little more public funding would not really bring any equality or change the mix of who can do it. Who would there be in Toronto that want's to be an alpine skier if only they had an extra $1,000 government subsidy to make it work? The difference from never being able to attempt it, to actually making it to the elite level for them is probably more like needing a $100,000 government subsidy, just for that one person, every year, for at least a decade.

Now you apply that to 100 more people in each of 20 sports... now we're at $200 million per year so someone has a chance to get a gold medal in luge. Yay. We won't even remember their name 30 minutes after watching them win it.

An aside, but it's always been curious to me why the Dutch aren't better at ice hockey. They're great at speed skating, and they're good at field hockey, but are MIA in ice hockey. Weird.

No idea if it's related, but the Dutch love field hockey way more than ice hockey. That might be what pulls in the top talent.

 

[Mihairokov]

No idea if it's related, but the Dutch love field hockey way more than ice hockey. That might be what pulls in the top talent.

I'm wondering why that love for field hockey hasn't transitioned into ice hockey, since they're already great and obsessed with skating. Anyway.

Now you apply that to 100 more people in each of 20 sports... now we're at $200 million per year so someone has a chance to get a gold medal in luge. Yay. We won't even remember their name 30 minutes after watching them win it.

IIRC some of our sliding athletes have to pay their own way to the Olympics because we don't have/don't provide the funding for them. I can't remember the specifics but one of/a couple of the athletes were out five figures just to get to Milan to compete.

There's also the issue of how some sports simply have more medals per effort than others. There's something like 28 gold medals given out for sports involving skiing and snowboarding, while there's only 2 for hockey and something like 4 for curling, which is weird as they dominate so much of the Olympic games. It seemed like there were ten curling matches every single day through the entirety of the games. Hundreds of people play competitively to work their way up to that national curling team or the hockey teams, but we're never going to have hundreds with an opportunity to seriously attempt to be a world class competitive alpine skier in Canada.

Skiing is infamously, like, the most expensive sport one can compete in, outside of maybe equestrian or motor racing. I know of people who lived in Atlantic Canada who would routinely fly to BC for events...most sports are becoming inherently expensive, though. Try getting serious in figure skating or hockey and you'll see how quickly the costs pile up.

What you're describing is something that RBC Training Ground is meant to address, where they have literally just open tryouts for sporadic events in different parts of the country where there normally wouldn't be access to something like luge or alpine skiing. Part of the reason why so many former football/rugby players take part in bobsled for us is because they're the only ones with the time and money to devote to it on their own.

Anyway, like I said before on curling/hockey not being worth a lot of medals, they've added a new mixed curling medal which we haven't had a ton of success with, and it's possible they can add more hockey events in the future - i'd lean towards something like men's and women's 3v3, or mixed 3v3 depending on how they go, but those are probably another cycle away from being included at the earliest. I know there's been a push to move Basketball to the Winter Olympics so there isn't such a disparity b/w Summer and Winter sizes, but I don't see why Winter couldn't also include something like Handball, Futsal, or Ball/Roller Hockey, the former of which was/is dominated by countries who are frequently at the Winter Olympics. Handball is usually won by Denmark/France/Norway/Sweden/Spain...seems like an easy decision to me. Their World Championships are usually in January.

 

[Jonny5]

Skiing is infamously, like, the most expensive sport one can compete in, outside of maybe equestrian or motor racing. I know of people who lived in Atlantic Canada who would routinely fly to BC for events...most sports are becoming inherently expensive, though. Try getting serious in figure skating or hockey and you'll see how quickly the costs pile up.

Oh, yeah, I know someone who knows a family with a child considered to be a potential elite figure skating talent and simply the dress she has to wear can cost well over $1,000, and you need more than one for every competition, and it is frowned upon to not buy new ones for every skating event.

Then there's the special coaching which is absolutely insane at like a week long training session in the summer easily being $5,000 and regular coaching costing $50,000 through the season.

Think about all those costs and then this: she's only 12 years-old.

They're spending something like $100,000 a year on it for her and she's maybe possibly going to become a top figure skater, but no guarantee at all. How does an average family ever choose to fund that? They don't.